Pages

Wednesday, January 28, 2015

Pain from Vaccination Registers Higher in Young Infant Brain Waves

The average person realizes that shots hurt. There's a reason children
scream and cry in anguish when they receive vaccinations. Apparently,
this tidbit hasn't registered much among the medical community or else
why would there be a need to widely publish EEG results of infants at
the moment they get jabs? People tend to think babies will move on
quickly and forget sooner....

Not only does the following study demonstrate the painful results of
babies getting jabs, but is said to be the first time that recordings of
brain activity have been conducted in response to real-life needle pain
in infants.

It would seem like a study of this nature would have been performed eons
ago, and on that note it is morbid that such a study is needed at all.
Perhaps it is a growing distaste for vaccines that prompts a study like
this with the aim of supporting future painless vaccines or some type of
pain relief at the time of inoculation.

The pro-vaccine authors want the public and the
health care providers to know that vaccines are the most common cause of
procedural pain in children. That the pain is real and can lead to
lifelong fear of needles, trauma and distrust.

As it happens, researchers from University College London, with their work
published in the International Association for the Study of Pain's
recent issue of PAIN®, want to focus on future pain-relieving measures.

"We have shown that inoculation evokes, from the time of the first
needle contact, a clearly defined EEG response in infants up to at least
one year of age," they say.

The researchers performed elecroencephalography (EEG) in 15 healthy
babies receiving routine vaccinations. A noninvasive and painless
procedure, EEG is done to measure electrical activity in the brain,
using electrodes placed in specific locations on the scalp. Twelve
infants were tested during vaccinations at age one to two months, and
five at age 12 months.

Dr Verriotis and colleagues compared the EEG findings with behavioral
pain responses: facial expression, crying, and movements. Such
behavioral responses are the standard method for assessing pain in
preverbal infants. The researchers filmed the procedures to identify the
precise timing of EEG responses to vaccination pain.

The EEG recordings showed two clear waveforms, or "spikes," which
appeared within milliseconds after the first contact of the needle with
the infant's skin. Although the waveforms appeared in both age groups, they were significantly larger in one- to two-month-old infants than in one-year-olds.

In three infants studied at both ages, the EEG
responses--particularly for the first waveform--appeared clearer and
larger at age 12 months. The EEG patterns were also more reproducible in
older infants. The researchers suggest that these age-related
differences might reflect developmental changes in the brain during the
first year of life: an increased number of neurons (nerve cells), a
larger proportion of neurons being activated, or better synchronization
of firing activity.
Then, vaguely, they suggest that behavioral pain perceived (maxing 8 on a
10-point scale) doesn't necessarily match the EEG, which does show the
brain trying to process the pain. Does that mean the actual pain was
less or worse than the behavioral signs? Not clear, but the point was to
demonstrate the reality of vaccine pain despite behavior (although most
children respond in the obvious way to vaccination).

The fact that the wave forms were larger in young infants versus
one-year-olds despite the same obvious behavior from both says something
about development. Is it really a great idea to experience that type of
high-threshold trauma so early in life?

What also stands out when viewing this study is: society punishes
parents who spank their children - but what are the implications of an
authority figure taking her infant to another authority figure and
handing them over for a painful injection, and again later on with
implied promises of "you'll get better" or this is "for your own good
(and society's)?" Where it's possible that neither party fully
comprehends not only the ingredients' effects in the bloodstream, but
the long-term biological impact.

Intellectual Center Reviews

Intellectual Center provides Independent News in blog format to assist other activists, teachers, and elders with alternative news, information on social issues, and research material.

FAIR USE NOTICE: Intellectual Center (Website) may post copyrighted material not specifically authorized in accordance with Section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law allowing purposes associating learning processes. Please be advised if you intend to use such copyrighted material for personal reasons beyond "fair use," considerations, please obtain permission from the copyright owner. Learning processes encompass a vast array of issues of concern and would not be restrictive, it would offer critique and extended scholarly research.

Website may display third party authors/advertising which may not represent the views or opinions of Website or contributors. Advertisements are not endorsed as such and are intended as alternative ways to support the work at Website.